Economic model - Revision history

TiberiusB: /* Main theoretical tenants */

2026-10-31T18:57:05Z

Main theoretical tenants

TiberiusB at 18:51, 31 October 2026

2026-10-31T18:51:06Z

TiberiusB: /* Economic models and sources of livelihood */

2026-10-31T18:46:38Z

Economic models and sources of livelihood

TiberiusB: /* Economic models and sources of livelihood */

2026-06-09T17:45:26Z

Economic models and sources of livelihood

TiberiusB at 23:10, 8 June 2026

2026-06-08T23:10:04Z

TiberiusB at 23:09, 8 June 2026

2026-06-08T23:09:09Z

TiberiusB: /* Knowledge commons */

2026-06-08T23:06:16Z

Knowledge commons

TiberiusB: /* Knowledge commons */

2026-06-08T22:56:27Z

Knowledge commons

TiberiusB: /* About resources */

2026-06-08T22:54:31Z

About resources

TiberiusB: /* Main theoretical tenants */

2026-06-08T22:37:52Z

Main theoretical tenants

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 First, please consider the notion of [[value]], then come back to read further.
-The possibility of stable, sustainable open networks at global-scale is no more questionable, they exist in almost all spheres of human activity. The poster child of this movement is the [[Bitcoin]] network. There are reasons to criticize some of its features and even its path of development since its launch in 2008, but there is an architectural pattern of this network-type organization and of its economic model that is prefigurative of the ''p2p economy'':
+The possibility of stable, sustainable ''open networks'' at global-scale is no more questionable, they exist in almost all spheres of human activity. The poster child of this movement is the [[Bitcoin]] network. There are reasons to criticize some of its features and even its path of development since its launch in 2008, but there is an architectural pattern of this ''network-type'' [[organization]] and of its economic model that is prefigurative of the ''p2p economy'':
 * [[Property]] - The network's infrastructure is not under the ''private'' of ''public'' [[property]] regime, it is a [[nondominium]], i.e. it belongs to no one, but anyone has [[permissionless]] access, under a given set of rules that are immutable (baked into the protocol).
 * [[Transparency]] - Everything about the network (the code or software on which it runs, functioning metrics, development activities, wallets, transactions, etc.) are accessible to anyone.
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
-If we listen carefully to [[Ronald Coase]], we can understand why ''open networks'' are possible. In essence, the Internet '''reduces [[transaction costs]] among economic [[agents]]'''. We join other individuals into an arrangement, we join [[organizations]], or we centralize to reduce the costs of transactions, so that we have more to gain than if we operated independently. But Coase still talks about [[firms]] and [[markets]], not about [[networks]]. In some sense, he says that individuals can operate as independent freelancers, transacting on the open market, if the cost of transactions are sufficiently low, so that no extra advantage can be gained by operating within an organization.
+If we listen carefully to [[Ronald Coase]], we can understand why ''open networks'' are possible. In essence, the Internet '''reduces [[transaction costs]] among economic [[agents]]'''. We join other individuals into an arrangement, we join [[organizations]], or we centralize to reduce the costs of transactions, so that we have more to gain than if we operated independently. But Coase still talks about [[firms]] and [[markets]], not about [[networks]]. In some sense, he says that individuals can operate as independent freelancers, transacting on the "open market", if the cost of transactions are sufficiently low, so that no extra advantage can be gained by operating within a closed organization.
@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 * On the one hand, the ceiling rises, meaning large firms can grow even larger without becoming inefficient.
 * On the other hand, small firms are becoming more competitive because they can handle the complexities of larger markets.
-This decline in transaction costs is a key element in the organisational transformations of the last three decades, creating today's environment where very large global players and relatively small companies can compete in global markets. Yet, a moderate decline does not affect the basic structure of production as being organised through firms and markets.
+This decline in transaction costs is a key element in the organizational transformations of the last three decades, creating today's environment where very large global players and relatively small companies can compete in global markets. Yet, a moderate decline does not affect the basic structure of production as being organized through firms and markets.
-: Shirky develops this idea into a different direction, by introducing the concept of the '''''Coasian floor'''''. Organised efforts underneath this floor are, as Shirky writes,''"valuable to someone but too expensive to be taken on in any institutional way, because the basic and unsheddable costs of being an institution in the first place make those activities not worth pursuing"''. Until recently, life underneath that floor was necessarily small scale because scaling up required building up an organisation and this was prohibitively expensive. Now, and this is Shirky's central claim, '''even large group efforts are no longer dependent on the existence of a formal organisation with its overheads'''. Or, as he memorably puts it, ''"we are used to a world where little things happen for love, and big things happen for money. ... Now, though, we can do big things for love"''. (http://www.metamute.org/en/content/analysis_without_analysis)
+: Shirky develops this idea into a different direction, by introducing the concept of the '''''Coasian floor'''''. Organised efforts underneath this floor are, as Shirky writes,''"valuable to someone but too expensive to be taken on in any institutional way, because the basic and unsheddable costs of being an institution in the first place make those activities not worth pursuing"''. Until recently, life underneath that floor was necessarily small scale because scaling up required building up an organization and this was prohibitively expensive. Now, and this is Shirky's central claim, '''even large group efforts are no longer dependent on the existence of a formal organisation with its overheads'''. Or, as he memorably puts it, ''"we are used to a world where little things happen for love, and big things happen for money. ... Now, though, we can do big things for love"''. (http://www.metamute.org/en/content/analysis_without_analysis)
 :  Imported from [https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production P2P Foundation wiki]

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:51, 31 October 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:

	As mentioned above, ''p2p economics'' can be interpreted as the institutional expression of [[complexity economics]], which sees ''economies'' as ''adaptive ecologies of interacting agents''.		As mentioned above, ''p2p economics'' can be interpreted as the institutional expression of [[complexity economics]], which sees ''economies'' as ''adaptive ecologies of interacting agents''.
−	''P2P economics'' proposes a practical institutional pattern for such ecologies: open participation, shared commons, stigmergic signals, contribution accounting, peer governance, and nondominium infrastructure. In this sense, OVNs are not just "alternative organizations." They are ''complexity-processing institutions''.	+	''P2P economics'' proposes a practical institutional pattern for such ecologies: open participation, shared [[commons]], [[stigmergic signals]], [[contribution accounting]], [[peer governance]], and [[nondominium]] infrastructure. In this sense, OVNs are not just "alternative organizations." They are ''complexity-processing institutions''.

@@ Line 310: / Line 310: @@
 ==Economic models and sources of livelihood==
-See more on [[Business models]].
+See more on [[Business model]].
 * Offer DIY kits (can be transactional kit sales) that provide required vitamins (non-digitally manufactured components) to build a particular tool (Zimmermann, 2014; Gibney, 2016).

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:45, 9 June 2026
Line 320:		Line 320:


−	[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1J_TfGXqWmeRDpiSMTKoI1nK1JH7CAFzJnVofpFG992k/edit#gid=92516243 ~~See also open business models patterns~~.]	+	See also [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1J_TfGXqWmeRDpiSMTKoI1nK1JH7CAFzJnVofpFG992k/edit#gid=92516243 Distributed Economic Model Patterns.]

	==Products==		==Products==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 An [[OVN]] implements principles of ''p2p economics'', also called ''collaborative economics'' or ''participatory economics''. Note that ''p2p economics'' is a branch of ''[[complexity economics]]''.
 Thus, this new economic model embodies new relations, new processes, new coordination mechanisms for '''[[sourcing]]''' (resources), '''innovation''' (creative work), '''[[production]]''', '''[[dissemination]]''' (or distribution) and '''capturing''' of [[benefits]], as performed by ''open networks'', i.e. by free [[agents]] who voluntary participate in [[permissionless]] processes.
 The OVN's ''mode of production'' is [[commons-based peer production]] or [[peer production]]. For pure or genuine [[peer production]] the [[infrastructure]] needs to be under the [[nondominium]] property regime, i.e. it needs to be ''uncapturable'' (by any entity, including Nation States).
 As mentioned above, ''p2p economics'' can be interpreted as the institutional expression of [[complexity economics]], which sees ''economies'' as ''adaptive ecologies of interacting agents''.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
-The OVN's ''mode of production'' is [[commons-based peer production]] or [[peer production]]. For pure or genuine peer production the [[infrastructure]] needs to be under the [[nondominium]] property regime, i.e. it needs to be ''uncapturable'' (by any entity, including Nation States).
+The OVN's ''mode of production'' is [[commons-based peer production]] or [[peer production]]. For pure or genuine [[peer production]] the [[infrastructure]] needs to be under the [[nondominium]] property regime, i.e. it needs to be ''uncapturable'' (by any entity, including Nation States).
@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
-All the above justifies why [[peer production]] can exist within capitalism or socialism and how it can displace, to a certain extent some firms, through [[decomodification]] (offering ''open source'' solutions that replace products and services). But this still cannot explain how ''peer production'' can reproduce itself outside capitalism or socialism.
+All the above justifies why [[peer production]] can exist within capitalism or socialism and how it can displace, to a certain extent some firms, through [[decomodification]] (offering ''open source'' solutions that replace products and services). But this still cannot explain how [[peer production]] can reproduce itself outside capitalism or socialism.
@@ Line 171: / Line 171: @@
-When it comes to holding shared material [[assets]] (physical spaces, equipment and consumables) for peer production, [[Sensorica]] implements the [[nondominium]] form of property. These shared material [[assets]] legally belong to the [[Custodian]], which acts as a trust, guaranteeing access to [[affiliates]] and preventing capture. The [[rules]] that govern the access (to use) are decided by [[affiliates]] through some [[governance]] process. The network also decides to allocate funds for maintenance, replenishment, and new acquisitions of shared material assets. These activities are, in general, performed by network [[affiliates]]. [[Sensorica]] offers paid use to some of these production [[assets]] (equipment) and percentage of the revenue generated by this commercial activity is extracted and kept for maintenance (materials and work). The [[Custodian]] is not allowed to exploit these shared resources for its own benefits, and this is enshrined by the [[Custodian Agreement]].
+When it comes to holding shared material [[assets]] (physical spaces, equipment and consumables) for [[peer production]], [[Sensorica]] implements the [[nondominium]] form of property. These shared material [[assets]] legally belong to the [[Custodian]], which acts as a trust, guaranteeing access to [[affiliates]] and preventing capture. The [[rules]] that govern the access (to use) are decided by [[affiliates]] through some [[governance]] process. The network also decides to allocate funds for maintenance, replenishment, and new acquisitions of shared material assets. These activities are, in general, performed by network [[affiliates]]. [[Sensorica]] offers paid use to some of these production [[assets]] (equipment) and percentage of the revenue generated by this commercial activity is extracted and kept for maintenance (materials and work). The [[Custodian]] is not allowed to exploit these shared resources for its own benefits, and this is enshrined by the [[Custodian Agreement]].
 =About agents=
@@ Line 220: / Line 220: @@
 OVNs implement [[commons-based peer production]], or [[peer production]] in their most extreme forms, a new, potentially [[self-sustaining]] and [[regenerative]] system of production.
-[[Resources]] are used by [[agents]] in [[peer production]]. [[Peer production]] is a process of co-creation or co-production. Unlike in traditional settings, in which process of production rely on exchanges (labour against tangible benefits, money for example), leading to the enclosure of the output by the entity that assumes the risk (the investors in the company for example), co-creation processes rely on [[contributions]], shared risk, as well as shared output. Thus, assets can avoid commidification because they are not exchanged during the co-creation process. Labour is also not commodified in peer production. No one is working ''for'' anyone else.
+[[Resources]] are used by [[agents]] in [[peer production]]. [[Peer production]] is a process of co-creation or co-production. Unlike in traditional settings, in which process of production rely on exchanges (labour against tangible benefits, money for example), leading to the enclosure of the output by the entity that assumes the risk (the investors in the company for example), co-creation processes rely on [[contributions]], shared risk, as well as shared output. Thus, assets can avoid commidification because they are not exchanged during the co-creation process. Labour is also not commodified in [[peer production]]. No one is working ''for'' anyone else.
 [[Peer production]] relies on [[stigmergy]], which leads to [[self-organizing]] (emerging [[role]] structures) of [[agents]]. In such networks, the actions of [[agents]] (or [[affiliates]]) is coordinated towards a shared outcome, while facilitating access to the [[resources]] required in the [[process]]. It describes a new model of socioeconomic production in which the labour of [[agents]] is coordinated (usually with the aid of the Internet) outside of traditional institutional frameworks. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_production Wikipedia]

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:06, 8 June 2026
Line 182:		Line 182:
	=Knowledge commons=		=Knowledge commons=

−	Innovation processes in ''open networks'' are heavily dependent on [[collective intelligence]]. Documentation is the substrate on which ''collective intelligence'' can develop, with the help of collaboration and coordination tools (within the [[digital environment]]). The output of collaboration, or open innovation remains open in the sense of [[intellectual property]], i.e. it is distributed under ''open source'' or ''creative commons'' licenses.	+	'''''Knowledge commons'' is the living expression of collective intelligence.'''
		+
		+
		+	Innovation requires knowledge. Innovation processes in ''open networks'' are heavily dependent on [[collective intelligence]]. Documentation is the substrate on which ''collective intelligence'' can develop, with the help of collaboration and coordination tools (within the [[digital environment]]). The output of collaboration, or open innovation remains open in the sense of [[intellectual property]], i.e. it is distributed under ''open source'' or ''creative commons'' licenses.
		+
		+	In our opinion, '''it is not useful to think of knowledge as a resource'''. Some call knowledge an ''intangible resource'', or intangible asset of an organization, a group. Some call it knowledge capital. For clarity, we want to keep the term "resource" to stuff that can be well identified / delineated, measured, inventoried, tracked, ...
		+	We can think of information, documents, 3D models, code, scientific papers as resources. They are fixed artifacts, which can be unambiguously identified, which have a location (an address in a database of some sort, can be accessed by agents and transferred from one location to another or from one custodian to another.
		+
		+
		+	Knowledge is a living thing, cannot be dissociated from an individual. Knowledge can be expressed collectively, as an expression of [[collective intelligence]]. Knowledge can produce information, in the form of artifacts like documents, G-code, a computer program, etc.
		+

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:56, 8 June 2026
Line 180:		Line 180:


−	==Knowledge commons==	+	=Knowledge commons=

−	Innovation processes in open networks are heavily dependent on [[collective intelligence]]. Documentation is the substrate on which collective intelligence can develop, with the help of collaboration and coordination tools (digital ~~environments~~). The output of collaboration, open innovation remains open, in the sense of intellectual property, ~~often~~ distributed ~~using~~ ''open source'' or ''creative commons'' licenses.	+	Innovation processes in ''open networks'' are heavily dependent on [[collective intelligence]]. Documentation is the substrate on which ''collective intelligence'' can develop, with the help of collaboration and coordination tools (within the [[digital environment]]). The output of collaboration, or open innovation remains open in the sense of [[intellectual property]], i.e. it is distributed under ''open source'' or ''creative commons'' licenses.

@@ Line 146: / Line 146: @@
 =About resources=
 '''See also [[Resource types]]''' in the context of the [[contribution accounting system]]
-In terms of available [[resources]], OVNs are very elastic, as in pure p2p mode everything is [[crowdsourced]].
+==Shared material assets==
-OVNs are ''unbounded organizations'', which comes from their ''[[openness]]'' (in terms of [[permissionless]] access to participation). Their ''[[transparency]]'' (in terms of access to information) allows needs to propagate through the ecosystem, which can attract new participants ([[agents]] or [[affiliates]]) to make different types of [[contributions]], because they can, since the network is open. In that sense, the network is not bounded by a limited pool of [[resources]] (ex. budget, physical space, equipment capacity, number of employees, etc.) like traditional [[organizations]]. Its [[resources]] can expand very dynamically based on needs and depending on the incentives that are provided.
+See [[Pool of shareables]], [[commons]] and [[nondominium]].
-===Human resources===
+See [[Yochay Benkler]]'s second advantage of ''open networks'': [[resource]] [[allocation]].
-==Shared material assets==
+An [[OVN]] is decentralized in terms of [[allocation]] of [[resources]]. In other words, [[resources]] used in its [[processes]] that are under the ''private [[property]] regime'' are provided by [[affiliates]] (as original owners of these resources), in the form of [[contributions]]. Some of these private [[assets]] are lumped as [[pool of shareables]], another mixed [[property]] regime, in order to harmonize their access and rules of use by any [[affiliate]] contributing to a [[venture]] within the OVN. Like in traditional [[open source]] projects, every [[affiliate]] decides where to allocate private [[resources]] for reasons that are purely individual and/or collectively agreed upon. Yet other [[resources]] come as [[commons]] or [[nondominium]], stewarded within communities, [[ventures]] or larger networks.
-See [[Pool of shareables]]
-==Knowledge commons==
+[[DAO]]s use [[web3]] financial primitives in conjunction with ''on-chain voting'' mechanisms for funds [[allocation]]. Often, a ''proposal'' process is used, where [[agents]] present an action plan with a budget and other agents affiliated with the [[DAO]] vote to accept or reject the proposal. In this case, the fine administration of the budget is left to those who execute the action. Some oversight or quality check or auditing can be applied.
-See [[Commons]].
-==Resource [[allocation]]==
+When it comes to holding shared material [[assets]] (physical spaces, equipment and consumables) for peer production, [[Sensorica]] implements the [[nondominium]] form of property. These shared material [[assets]] legally belong to the [[Custodian]], which acts as a trust, guaranteeing access to [[affiliates]] and preventing capture. The [[rules]] that govern the access (to use) are decided by [[affiliates]] through some [[governance]] process. The network also decides to allocate funds for maintenance, replenishment, and new acquisitions of shared material assets. These activities are, in general, performed by network [[affiliates]]. [[Sensorica]] offers paid use to some of these production [[assets]] (equipment) and percentage of the revenue generated by this commercial activity is extracted and kept for maintenance (materials and work). The [[Custodian]] is not allowed to exploit these shared resources for its own benefits, and this is enshrined by the [[Custodian Agreement]].
-See [[Yochay Benkler]]'s second advantage of open networks: [[resource]] [[allocation]].
+=About agents=
-An [[OVN]] is decentralized in terms of [[allocation]] of [[resources]]. In other words, most of the [[resources]] used in its [[processes]] are under the ''private [[property]] regime'' and are provided by [[affiliates]] (as original owners of these resources), in the form of [[contributions]]. Some of these private [[assets]] are lumped as [[pool of shareables]], another [[property]] regime, in order to harmonize their access and rules of use by any [[affiliate]] contributing to a [[venture]] within the OVN. Like in traditional [[open source]] projects, every [[affiliate]] decides where to allocate [[resources]] for reasons that are purely individual and/or collectively agreed upon. Yet other [[resources]] come as [[commons]] or [[nondominium]].
+See also the [[Role system]], [[Reputation system]]  - [NOTE to participants: expand on this...] [[Talk:Economic_model|discussion for this page]]
-In practice, [[Sensorica]] has used grants, in fiat currency, which have gone into a shared funding pool, a budget, administered by a [[Custodian]], with input from [[affiliates]]. Thus the [[Custodian]] offers financial services to [[ventures]] within the [[OVN]], holds funds in its bank account and administers them according to the collective will of [[venture]] [[affiliates]], based on priorities and/or [[planning]], which must be public. Distribution of funds from a shared [[budget]] associated with a [[venture]] is also contingent on emergent priorities and / or [[planning]]. [[Crowdfunding]] a [[venture]] also produce a shared pool of monetary assets that needs to be managed by the [[venture]]'s [[affiliates]].
+==Knowledge commons==
-When it comes to holding shared material [[assets]] (physical spaces, equipment and consumables) for peer production, [[Sensorica]] implements the [[nondominium]] form of property. These shared material [[assets]] legally belong to the [[Custodian]], which acts as a trust, guaranteeing access to [[affiliates]] and preventing capture. The [[rules]] that govern the access (to use) are decided by [[affiliates]] through some [[governance]] process. The network also decides to allocate funds for maintenance, replenishment, and new acquisitions of shared material assets. These activities are, in general, performed by network [[affiliates]]. [[Sensorica]] offers paid use to some of these production [[assets]] (equipment) and percentage of the revenue generated by this commercial activity is extracted and kept for maintenance (materials and work). The [[Custodian]] is not allowed to exploit these shared resources for its own benefits, and this is enshrined by the [[Custodian Agreement]].
+See also [[stigmergy]], [[commons]], [[OVN license]].
 =Currency=

@@ Line 54: / Line 54: @@
 From [[Tibi]]'s older writings:
 : The type of organizational arrangement depends on the type or the area of activity. Thus we can form private, public, cooperative (co-ops) and non profit [[organizations]]. We live in cities, build nation [[states]] and form international alliances. Today, we can also organize as global, [[transnational]] ''open networks''. There is a blueprint for every type of [[organization]], which prescribes a set of relations or [[roles]], policies, methods and procedures, infrastructure and tools, as well as capturing and redistribution mechanisms for [[valuables]]. People decide to restrict their individual autonomy by entering in relation with others according to an organizational blueprint, that is to join an [[organization]], to increase their collective capacity beyond the sum of their individual [[capacities]] and, in doing so, to [[benefit]] from their collective output. If they don't gain in [[capacity]] and [[benefits]], they will likely operate alone until a new form of [[organization]] that provides greater advantages emerges, if possible.
 [[Tibi]]'s argument is that one of the drivers for collaboration is not only access to [[benefits]] of various kinds, which relates to motivations and incentives, but also the desire to do more, to have a greater impact. This collaboration can happen in various settings, using traditional organizations (where Coases analysis applies) or ''open networks'' (where Benkler's analysis applies, with the additions by Shirky). But collaboration must be possible, so Feldstein's maxim stands, the costs of participation must be low enough, although people may also collaborate if costs are high, in some cases, if the stakes are high, if they are driven by a shared purpose let's say, as long as the shared purpose is reachable. Sometimes the organizational form that people chose to adopt can depend on other factors, which are not economic in nature, but relate to other shared values, like privacy or anonymity for example. The [[benefits]] that people seek may not be economic in nature, but spiritual for example. In the end, people are seeking to achieve their goals, which may require capacities that surpass the individual, in ways that aligned with their needs and values, and benefit from that, in various ways that every participant perceives. This is what we call, in OVN language, a '''''[[value]] experience'''''.